Why the study?
Does the release of the POISE Trial results change the rate of effective perioperative beta-blockade in high-risk patients presenting for non-cardiac surgery?
Does the release of the POISE Trial results change the rate of effective perioperative beta-blockade in high-risk patients presenting for non-cardiac surgery?
The publication of the POISE trial did not significantly change the low rate of effective perioperative beta-blockade implementation in high-risk non-cardiac surgery patients.
Effective perioperative beta-blockade rates remained low after POISE; leaves open whether targeted implementation strategies can improve adherence in high-risk non-cardiac surgery.
The POISE Trial was a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of the effectiveness of perioperative beta-blockade in preventing cardiac events including death in 8351 patients. Our hypothesis was that knowledge of the results of the POISE Trial would either increase or decrease the use of effective perioperative beta-blockade, depending on the result. Patients presenting for non-cardiac surgery and at risk of perioperative cardiac events were recruited in two cohorts before and after the release of the POISE Trial results. Effective perioperative beta-blockade was defined as heart rate <65 beats per minute for at least 80% of the perioperative period in patients prescribed beta-blockers. Effective perioperative beta-blockade was achieved in 22 (11.5%) of 191 patients prescribed perioperative beta-blockade in the first cohort (n=392) and seven (6%) of 118 patients in the second cohort (n=241) (P=0.10). Effective heart rate control was achieved in 29 (9%) patients prescribed perioperative beta-blockers compared with 10 (3%) patients not prescribed perioperative beta-blockers (P=0.001). The rate of implementation of effective beta-blockade was low before POISE and this did not change significantly after publication. Our finding does not provide reliable evidence of a change in practice as a result of the POISE Trial.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leslie et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: